HANSARD
NOVA SCOTIA HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO REVIEW
THE ESTIMATES OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL
AND THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER
Wednesday, January 25, 2023
Committee Room
Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO REVIEW
THE ESTIMATES OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL
AND THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER
Hon. Keith Bain (Chair)
Angela Simmonds (Vice-Chair)
Hon. Kim Masland
Hon. Allan MacMaster
Danielle Barkhouse
Hon. Derek Mombourquette
Hon. Keith Irving
Susan Leblanc
James Charlton, Chief Clerk of the House of Assembly
(Non-Voting Member)
In Attendance:
Gordon Hebb
Chief Legislative Counsel
Matthew Timmons
Director of Operations and Administration - Office of the Speaker
David Hastings
Assistant Clerk of the House of Assembly
Hon. Kelly Regan
Chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts
WITNESSES
Office of the Auditor General
Kim Adair
Auditor General
Mike MacPhee
Deputy Auditor General
Elections Nova Scotia
Dorothy Rice
Chief Electoral Officer
HALIFAX, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 25, 2023
SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO REVIEW
THE ESTIMATES OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL
AND THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER
4:03 P.M.
CHAIR
Hon. Keith Bain
VICE CHAIR
Angela Simmonds
THE CHAIR: Order, please. We’ll call the meeting of the Special Committee to Review the Estimates of the Auditor General and the Chief Electoral Officer to order. I’m going to ask the committee members to introduce themselves; I’ll introduce myself first. I’m Keith Bain, Speaker of the Nova Scotia House of Assembly. Ms. Simmonds.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
THE CHAIR: Thank you. I’d also like to acknowledge the presence of other people who are here. Ms. Regan thought we were going to forget about her, but I wanted to introduce the Honourable Kelly Regan, Chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. She’s entitled to attend under Section 16 of the Auditor General Act and Section 19 of the Elections Act. I also want to recognize James Charlton, Chief Clerk; Gordon Hebb, Chief Legislative Counsel; and Matthew Timmons, our Director of Operations and Administration.
The agenda and the materials were circulated in advance of the meeting, and the representatives of both Elections Nova Scotia and the Office of the Auditor General have each requested an opportunity to make brief opening remarks at the Special Committee before this Special Committee considers their estimates.
Does the committee agree with all this? Agreed? Okay.
First off, we’ll invite representatives of Elections Nova Scotia to come forward to take a seat and introduce themselves and make their opening remarks.
DOROTHY RICE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon and thank you for this opportunity to present our budget request. As an independent, non-partisan agency, Elections Nova Scotia reports to the members of the House of Assembly through the Speaker.
Our mission - to deliver provincial elections impartially and professionally - is drawn from the Elections Act. Our vision to be trusted by all Nova Scotians to excel in the delivery of fair and inclusive elections is founded on our independence from the executive branch of Nova Scotia’s government. We are one of the four independent offices of this House that are charged with upholding government accountability. Independence for election management bodies is a widely accepted international norm and is the single most important attribute of a credible electoral authority.
Elections Nova Scotia has undergone several changes in the last year, and I would like to thank my predecessor, Richard Temporale, for his leadership through three general elections during his 10-year appointment in the role of Chief Electoral Officer. I would also like to acknowledge that the budget preparation and program planning has been made easier since the introduction of fixed election date legislation in 2021. The four-year cycle that we plan for enables better scheduling for hiring of staff, training, equipment and materials procurement, and the rental of voting locations. The next general election is scheduled for July of 2025, and the intense period of preparation and spending will take place in the 2024-2025 fiscal year.
In the last year, ENS has recommended legislative changes following the introduction of fixed elections and the 2021 provincial general election. These proposed changes impact electoral finance and operations. The ideal timeline for introduction of these changes is in the Fall of 2023 sitting of the Legislature in order to incorporate all modifications in the training materials for returning office staff and the official agents of parties and candidates.
Just as independence and oversight go hand in hand, our presentation here today to this special committee provides a necessary measure of transparency and accountability to the members of the Assembly. The report you have before you today includes $728,000 of additional funding needed to fulfill our mandate compared to the budget targets received to date. That was at the December date. This includes ongoing funding requirements for projects presented and approved by this committee in last year’s budget for the e-voting mandate legislated in the Elections Act. Additional funding is also included for a full-time outreach coordinator to support ENS’s inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility programming. It also includes funding for one by-election, outside legal counsel, plus the incremental funding required by law for registered party annual payments.
For transparency purposes, we have segregated the amounts included for each of these initiatives to ensure you are fully informed of precisely what we intend to spend these funds on. If the Department of Finance and Treasury Board and the Treasury and Policy Board significantly alter the amounts you recommend to them today, I commit to send a report to each member of this committee summarizing the changes made.
I respectfully request that you accept our budget as presented, and recommend it without alteration to the Department of Finance and Treasury Board and to the Treasury and Policy Board, and I thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
THE CHAIR: Thank you, Ms. Rice, and, first of all, congratulations to you on your appointment as the Chief Electoral Officer as well. Are there any questions from any of the members? Mr. Irving.
HON. KEITH IRVING: Thank you for your presentation. I have a couple of questions, if I am permitted. First of all, I noticed last year you requested $50,000 in legal costs; you were granted nothing. What was the outcome of that? I see that you have, again, requested, I think it was, $52,000 for legal counsel.
DOROTHY RICE: That $50,000 is something we have been requesting on an ongoing basis because of the conflict of interest that we anticipate might happen sometime if we have to investigate a party-related incident that takes place. We haven’t had to do too many of those, and certainly none in the last year, but we do want to make sure that we have the provision for that should that occur.
KEITH IRVING: My second question is: Could you give us some more detail on the additional funds for outreach strategy that you’ve identified as a new emerging priority? Is that a priority of government or a priority of yours, and what would that entail?
DOROTHY RICE: That is a priority of our office. We just published a new strategic plan in the Summer of this year, and one of the main tenets of that is to increase our outreach to groups that we believe may need a little bit of extra urging to become part of the electoral process. It also matches nicely with the government’s initiatives for diversity and for accessibility.
KEITH IRVING: One quick supplementary: Has this idea been run by government, or is this the first time that my colleagues at the table here are hearing about it? Have you got any indication from government of support of this?
DOROTHY RICE: We haven’t officially presented this to any government officials. We have certainly included it here and we’ve included it in our publicly made strategic plan.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Mombourquette.
HON. DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: Just on one of your comments - thanks for being here, I appreciate it - in regard to funding for one by-election: In the event you have multiple, how does that impact your budget?
DOROTHY RICE: Should we have more than one by-election in this fiscal year, we would have to go back to the Department of Finance and Treasury Board and request additional funds for that. Each by-election costs around a quarter of a million dollars, so at this point we’ve submitted for one.
THE CHAIR: Any further discussion or questions? Ms. Regan.
HON. KELLY REGAN: Just one. I noted under service delivery and development, there is an increase of a fair bit to $590,000 from a forecast of $300,000 for 2022-2023. Was that the outreach there? Was that part of that?
DOROTHY RICE: Part of that is for outreach, but the bulk of it is for the e-voting system that we are in the process of awarding a contract for in the next few weeks.
KELLY REGAN: When you say e-voting, what would that be used for? Obviously for voting, but also in what particular circumstances would a person be allowed to do an electronic vote?
DOROTHY RICE: Under our current legislation, we are authorized to provide e-voting. At this point, it is to a small group of military personnel who are stationed outside of Nova Scotia. That is our first step into this new initiative.
THE CHAIR: Mr. Mombourquette, do you have another question?
DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: Just following up on MLA Regan’s - you may have just answered it. It was around the e-voting. How do you envision the next year? Maybe this is a conversation for a larger discussion, but I’m just curious on the e-voting just based on the capacity to do it. There’s probably better capacity in urban areas as compared to rural areas when it comes to e-voting. Are you guys looking at that as well, expanding it beyond? Are you saying it’s military now, but is the plan to try to expand as far as you can?
DOROTHY RICE: At this point, it is certainly just for the military who are stationed outside of Nova Scotia, and this is a step in that journey, and we’ll see where it goes from there. We’re trying to build some confidence and some security here. We will be the first province in Canada to introduce electronic voting.
[4:15 p.m.]
THE CHAIR: Any further discussion or questions? Hearing none, I’d ask for someone to move that the Special Committee approve the estimates of the Chief Electoral Officer for the 2023-2024 fiscal year, and that the Chair recommend the estimates to the Department of Finance and Treasury Board for inclusion in the government’s estimates. Do we have a mover? Moved by Ms. Leblanc. Do we have a seconder? Mr. Irving.
All those in favour? Contrary minded? Thank you.
The motion is carried.
Now we’ll call on the Office of the Auditor General to come forward and introduce themselves, and we’ll ask for their presentation. Ms. Adair.
[The witnesses introduced themselves.]
THE CHAIR: Please make your presentation.
KIM ADAIR: We’re pleased to be here this afternoon to meet with the committee to take you through our budget request for the next fiscal year. I will just speak to some of the highlights and then certainly open it up to questions.
Essentially, we’re asking for incremental funding of $1.1 million. We’re currently at $5.2 million, and there’s a number in the chart that would bring us to $6.3 million. What is behind that ask? Essentially it’s to fund the health audit function. This is a new area of responsibility for our office. How it came about, just to give you a bit of background information: There was mention of this briefly in our budget documentation last year. It is in the mandate letter of the Minister of Health and Wellness to create a health audit function.
We were having preliminary conversations with government at that point in time about the notion of our office carrying out that role in addition to what we do now under the Auditor General Act. At the late stages of the budget process last year, we were given some preliminary funding, essentially funding for two positions, $277,000, and it was intended to get us started, to think through what this health audit function would look like. It is a new mandate. No other auditor general in Canada has what they call the health audit function responsibility. It’s a new concept. We needed to develop just what that would look like.
We’re now a year later. We’ve had some conversations with the health leadership team to essentially map out what we would deliver on. I can tell you it’s a three-pronged model that we would deliver on. We would do performance audits of the health area. Roughly of the total $14 billion annual spend of the government, the Department of Health and Wellness is $6 billion. To put it in context, we’re asking for $1.1 million to have an audit function devoted to health of - when you add the amount we got last year plus this year, it’s $1.4 million on a $6 billion spend.
There are the performance audits that we would do, our value-for-money audits; then there’s the weighing in on KPIs, key performance indicators. The government has a dashboard that is up for the public to see, so we would be an independent office that looks at the information behind that dashboard and reports on whether or not the public can rely on the information that is on that dashboard. That’s the second part. The third part is to weigh in on how Nova Scotia is delivering on health care performance indicators compared to other provinces in Canada.
Those are the preliminary discussions that we’ve had with the health leadership team. We took that back and looked at it and said, what kind of resourcing do we need to deliver on those three pieces? What was important to me is that this additional new function wasn’t able to erode the work of the office that we already do. What we’re asking for today is essentially $1.1 million, and very rough numbers. The chart is in the report, and I can speak to the details, but it’s around half a million dollars to fund five positions. That’s four more auditors to add to the two whom we have just recently hired - so that’s four - and then there’s one more position for what we’re calling a finance, budget and procurement officer.
We’re an independent office, so we don’t have the government finance function or procurement people we rely on or can use. Up to this point in time, that function - we have been using a portion of an auditor to carry it out. But we’re at the point in time where we’re growing. This would put us in the range of 40 people. What we’re asking here is to have a devoted person to do that. So that’s the first $500,000.
The rest is operations. The biggest chunk of that is to hire health experts. It’s roughly $300,000, because we know that we have a lot of skillsets within the office. Some of you are members of the Public Accounts Committee and you know what we have in terms of the professional team, but we are not health experts. So we’ve added some consulting funding into the ask so that when we’re looking at, say, the ambulance system, for example - which is something we’re looking at - if we want to hire health experts in that field, or primary care or ER operations. There are so many areas that we’ll be getting into that we anticipate needing that consulting expertise funding. It would not be a permanent position in our office, but it would be specific to whatever audit we’re doing at any point in time.
In addition to that, there’s some funding to move some walls in the office to be able to fit the additional people in. We’re not proposing to increase our footprint. We’re just going to sort of make people have some space within our existing square footage.
I think that gives you the highlights of our ask. Maybe now I’ll open it up to questions.
THE CHAIR: Questions from any of the members?
KEITH IRVING: I have to say, I fully support this initiative. I’m very happy to hear that government is behind this and will be supporting it, obviously, since it’s in a mandate letter.
Probably a couple of questions or comments here, but maybe I’ll just begin with the health performance indicators. Are there any concerns or risks of duplication of data that are already out there? In other words - I believe it’s called CIHI - the Canadian Institute for Health Information or something - that has a lot of data across the country that does that work of comparing to other provinces. Have you looked into that and envisioned, I guess, an enhancement of that data? Or are there any risks of overlap, or are you not quite into that level of detail?
KIM ADAIR: You mentioned the CIHI data. That’s essentially the database that we would use when we’re looking at the provincial comparison to other provinces. We’re not sure yet how reliable that data is. We’re hoping that it’s an apples-to-apples comparison, province to province. They capture data both on a clinical basis and a financial basis for each province in Canada, so that’s what we plan to use.
In terms of duplication, we don’t want to duplicate the effort. That’s one of the reasons why we will have periodic meetings from time to time with the health leadership team. There is an internal audit function in the Nova Scotia Health Authority or the departments, so we will be consulting with them to make sure that we’re not duplicating effort.
There is a consultative approach here that I want to maintain. It’s important that we maintain our independence, yet we’re not going to do it in isolation without talking to the senior leadership in government to make sure it all makes sense and that we add value and that we’re producing reports that - everything will be public. As you know, the work of our office is public, and we’re independent, so that’s why I think it’s a good fit for this function.
THE CHAIR: On the same topic? (Interruption) Okay. Ms. Leblanc, and then we’ll go back to Mr. Irving.
SUSAN LEBLANC: I have a question and a comment. My comment is, I fully support this. As a member of the Public Accounts Committee, I think it’s really important and I’m excited to see these new audits come down the pike. My question is: Do we need to see a change in legislation to add this as part of the mandate of the office?
KIM ADAIR: That’s a good question, and perhaps at some point, once we evolve it and develop it to know what it looks like, it might be time to look at legislation. I think that within the existing Act, we do have the mandate to audit the total public purse and the total spending, which includes the $6 billion in health care, but there might be reason to make it a permanent arrangement for the office, at some point put it in legislation.
KEITH IRVING: My next question is on the health infrastructure. Where will that fit into this? That is outside of, obviously, that $6 billion in operational costs, but we are talking billions in capital costs. We’ve got a project right now with one bidder with the situation completely changing from the Auditor General’s views and advice on the P3 model. We now have high inflation and much higher borrowing costs. Will you be looking at that through this lens or through your main lens as the Auditor General?
KIM ADAIR: I see the capital piece part and parcel of the health audit function, but as you point out, we already have done performance audits on the capital spending in the health care area. Where the line is drawn, I don’t know that will matter, but I think the important thing is that we intend to report and do audits in that area the same as the rest of the operational spending.
KELLY REGAN: Just some questions about the numbers that are in the proposed budget. The Auditor General knows I’m a fan of the work of her office, but I’m just wanting to understand what some of the numbers are. In terms of membership dues, from $75,000 to $90,000, is that because the dues are increasing or is it because we’ll have more people on staff? Or both?
KIM ADAIR: It’s a little bit of both, yes.
KELLY REGAN: In terms of operating supplies, we go from $85,000 to $145,000. I was just wondering what accounts for the increase there.
KIM ADAIR: What is in there is $20,000 for IT equipment for five new positions and $40,000 for audio-visual equipment so that we can be better equipped for virtual meetings and the set-up in our boardroom and certain offices.
KELLY REGAN: My last one is - actually, last two: The professional services, we see it more than double, but just confirming that that is in fact the experts that you are bringing in around the health file? In terms of in-province travel, it almost doubles. Is that again because of the added scope that we’re talking about, from $17,000 to $30,000? Is that because of the added scope?
[4:30 p.m.]
KIM ADAIR: Yes. For that, as well as the fact that we’re now back into the pre-COVID-19 environment where we tend to work on site more and travel around the province.
THE CHAIR: Any further questions or discussion?
KEITH IRVING: I just want to conclude and make a few comments of how important I believe this is, and I want to note that you have the full support of the Opposition on this. I’m hoping with the government, because I know that we’ll leave this table and it will go to the Cabinet table where that decision will be made, but I think you’ve underscored the importance of the value of this envelope, and the need for additional oversight. I mean, we’ve got a situation right now where government is in crisis, and they’re being very reactive and making decisions very, very quickly.
I would submit that these are the times in which procurement processes can become lax, or checks and balances be skipped over, so I think it’s really important to have you work on this, and have the resources to ensure that taxpayers’ money is being spent wisely through this health care crisis. It’s when we have a government messaging to the private sector that we will spend whatever it takes and we will go like hell and we’ve got one bidder. We’re going to do this. I think it’s just important for Nova Scotians to know that there’s some accountability behind the spending decisions.
I think the federal government is asking the provinces for accountability in their spending as they continue to ask for more federal dollars. We know this year that the government will be receiving a 10.4 per cent increase in federal transfer. That’s significant dollars. The federal government is looking to the provinces for accountability. I believe that this work that you’re about to take on, and hopefully we will be funding, is actually critical to ensuring that we are getting value for taxpayers’ dollars as we move through this crisis.
THE CHAIR: Ms. Adair, I don’t know if you want to comment on that, or just - no.
KELLY REGAN: Just one question. I think during the last election, the government did campaign on having a health care auditor. Will there be one person in this office - one additional person - who is charged with that function? Will there be a health care auditor, or will it be shared amongst your other work? I’m just wondering how you see that working.
KIM ADAIR: Essentially, that would be me with the team that we’re asking to resource today. It’s essentially a devoted team within the office focused on this health audit function. I liken it to - in some provinces, the auditors general have an environment commissioner. It’s like a separate division or an arm within the Auditor General’s Office, but they produce independent reports on the environment. In this case, it will be on health care.
KELLY REGAN: We can expect a separate report from this team, or it will be coming from you? I just want to make sure we understand that.
KIM ADAIR: From me.
DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: I think it’s great. I think this is money well spent. I think the most up-to-date data we can have to provide to Nova Scotians, the better.
I’m just curious about a few more comments on the dashboard you say you’re looking at. That would be the Need a Family Practice Registry. Would you be looking at some of that stuff, too, as well, like what information we’re providing to the community? Because that stuff’s being updated on a monthly basis. I’m just curious. You’d be looking at some of that stuff as well in your performance audits?
KIM ADAIR: Yes.
DEREK MOMBOURQUETTE: Excellent. Good.
THE CHAIR: Any further discussion or questions? Hearing none, I’d ask that someone move that the Special Committee approve the estimates of the Office of the Auditor General for the 2023-2024 fiscal year, and that the Chair recommend the estimates to the Treasury Board for inclusion in the government’s estimates.
Moved by Mr. Mombourquette, seconded by Ms. Simmonds.
You’ve heard the motion. Ready for the question?
All those in favour?
Recorded vote. We’ll take a brief pause to have the recorded vote - unless you just want to go right to it and ask everybody? Okay.
[The Clerk calls the roll.]
[4:35 p.m.]
THE CLERK: Mr. MacMaster.
HON. ALLAN MACMASTER: I’ll have to abstain. I’m part of the official government budgeting process, and I don’t want to place myself in conflict before those decisions are made, so I’ll be abstaining.
YEAS NAYS
Danielle Barkhouse
Hon. Kim Masland
Susan Leblanc
Angela Simmonds
Hon. Keith Irving
Hon. Derek Mombourquette
Hon. Keith Bain
THE CLERK: For, 7. Against, zero.
THE CHAIR: The motion is carried.
That concludes the Special Committee meeting. I’m going to remind the members of the Special Committee that a meeting of the House of Assembly Management Commission will be conducted after we take a very short break.
Again, I want to thank the officials from Elections Nova Scotia and the Auditor General’s Office for coming here today and making your presentation. Thank you so much.
We’ll take a brief pause.
[The committee adjourned at 4:36 p.m.]
